Vijay vs Rohtash on 12 September, 2024
19. Thereafter, the plaintiff also summoned a witness from the
Delhi Jal Board. PW-3 Sh. Bal Kishan, JA, Delhi Jal Board proved on
record the water supply bill which was issued in the name of Sh. Jittu S/o
Sh. Bhola as Ex. PW3/1. Hence, from the record which was produced, it
could not be proved that the property was in the name of Sh. Chaman
Lal. During the course of oral arguments by the Ld. Counsel for the
plaintiff it was argued that Sh. Chaman Lal was the son of Sh. Jittu in
whose name the water connection and the MCD House Tax record was
there. However, no such evidence was led by the plaintiff to prove the
relationship between Sh. Chaman Lal and Sh. Jittu. Secondly, the
summoned record was in respect of property bearing no. WP-519,
Wazirpur Village while in the plaint, the details of the suit property were
mentioned by the plaintiff BW-519 Village Wazirpur. The plaintiff did
not lead any such evidence that both the addresses were of the same
property. Hence, in the opinion of the court, the plaintiff has failed to
CS DJ NO. 696/17
VIJAY VS. ROHTASH
Page no. 16 of 16
prove that Sh. Chaman Lal was the owner of the suit property at any
point of time.